warriorsstepup wrote:Jordan is on another level, Lebron will easily be top 3, but the its not really a discussion, as good as Lebron is, just tell you how great Jordan was. Jordan is perfection, on all basketball levels.

Well, that is certainly the brand he built up. He was very good at marketing himself or at least Nike was.

warriorsstepup wrote:Jordan is on another level, Lebron will easily be top 3, but the its not really a discussion, as good as Lebron is, just tell you how great Jordan was. Jordan is perfection, on all basketball levels.

Well, that is certainly the brand he built up. He was very good at marketing himself or at least Nike was.

I know, he wasn't as untouchable as you made him out to be. Lebron's best year is already better than Jordan's best year. Jordan being better overall in his first ten years compared to Lebron. All time race will be close, honestly.

The idea that he is perfect or untouchable is something he built up through his brand. He had a great marketing team. Nike built up the idea that "you have to be more Jordan like," but it's also something unachievable. They built up a myth. Which is incredibly impressive because he was obviously the GOAT.

This "brand" you're talking about was not based on smoke and mirrors. Michael Jordan is unquestionably the greatest player of all-time.

He was not "given" the perfect lineup around him, as you're claiming. Jordan MADE his teammates better. Pippen accomplished nothing outside of Chicago without Jordan. Kerr, Kukoc, and Ron Harper (following his knee surgeries) were bench depth EVERYWHERE outside of Chicago; Jordan made them offensive threats - after they left him, they fell off. Bill Cartwright was a starter-quality center who was at the absolute end of his career, ditto for John Salley, ditto for Robert Parish. Luc Longley was the epitome of serviceable, not spectacular, not even average since he played against the great era of centers. This story you're creating about Jordan having a 55-win team without him is a complete fiction. The Bulls won 13 games in 1999, after Jordan retired. That's a 49-win drop; greater than Cleveland's drop after losing LeBron and his Coach-of-the-Year and his entire supporting cast, EXACTLY like the Bulls.

Dennis Rodman, Horace Grant, and Scottie Pippen are the only players Jordan played with who were greatly above-average... and Pippen was the only other star he had. I can make you a real convincing argument that LeBron James had a better supporting cast. Outside of the greatest coach of all-time, LeBron's supporting cast was far better. Rodman was never a franchise player, Bosh was. Pippen was never a franchise player, Wade was.

Please. Wade was the franchise player on a championship team before LeBron. Did Pippen win a ring without Jordan?

Bosh was a franchise player; a 20 and 10 guy Toronto built around. No team built around Rodman. Fact.

Steve Kerr was a specialist 3-point shooter. Ray Allen is the greatest 3-point shooter of all-time.

Ron Harper was a 7 point, 2 assist player that played defense. Chalmers has better offensive numbers and an identical DRtg. Kukoc is the same type of player Lewis is, but Toni never averaged 20 points. Longley was the definition of serviceable; a tandem of Wennington and Longley is not better than a tandem of Birdman and Anthony. They are the exact same. Literally, the only advantage Jordan had on his roster was the coach.

You're making too many excuses for LeBron. That's why winning matters: it's the only thing that shuts up the critics. Jordan was a better player then LeBron. They were comparable players in a statistical, individual sense: Jordan the superior scorer and defender, James the better playmaker and rebounder. The Bulls won because Jordan made them win. The Heat choke because LeBron James has choked in every playoff season he's been in except the shortened season.

Scottie Pippen is the greatest EVER at defending his position. Rodman is the greatest rebounder of all time. Ray Allen is an absolute liability on defense, very efficient on offense.

It's not making excuses. The teams Jordan had were obviously better. Lebron played in Cleveland where he never in his entire tenure there got enough help, and the help on the Heat is greatly exhaggerated.

You know Wade's playoff stats? 490 TS percentage. .094 WS/48 (negative,) and the Heat are eight points better with him off the floor.

The help Jordan had was amazing. The coaching staff he had was amazing.

I think you are doing the opposite of making excuses to Lebron. You are exaggerating the impact of others. We aren't talking prime Allen. We aren't talking prime Wade, we are talking about hurt knee Wade who has been playing god awful. We are talking about just a spot up shooter in Allen.

32, you can't reasonably think the help they have gotten is the same or equivalent. That's silly, honestly and I think using championships to say Pippen is the eqivalent of Wade is absolutely compounding why this line of thinking is wrong.

And yes, we can see the impact they have on winning with their statistics. If they don't win, it's a major injustice to oversimplify and say "well, they aren't as great as the greats because they just couldn't do it."

It's more mental masturbation to reduce being an all time great to winning a championship. That's an awful qualifying basis. It's just the fun part of the sport, it's exciting. If you reduce it down to that or at least part of it, you are really missing the meat and potatoes of basketball and a players impact. Dirk didn't need to win a 2011 championship. He's still high on my all time list. It's the sexy part of the sport and that should be the goals of the players. Just not a standard we use to evaluate them. We would still know how much Dirk impacted the game and how much he meant to winning ball games. It wouldn't have been his fault if they didn't win.

Discounting it all together is wrong though. There are reasons that certain players win and certain players don't. For example: can you find me one tape of Jordan sucking in a Finals game as badly as LeBron did last night?